See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262640187

A framework for enterprise resource planning system selection by small and

medium enterprises

Chapter · January 2008

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4790.4805

CITATIONS READS

0 1,351

1 author:

Neetu Ganapathy
SDM Institute for Management Development
9 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Enterprise Resource Planning Implementation in Small and Medium Enterprises View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Neetu Ganapathy on 07 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Framework for Enterprise Resource Planning System Selection by Small and Medium
Enterprises
Neetu Ganapathy1, J. K. Raju2
1
SDM Institute for Management Development, Mysore, India
2
Institute for Management Studies, Kuvempu University Post Graduate Center, Davangere, India
neetuatsdmimd@yahoo.co.in
javaliraju@hotmail.com

Presented at the European Conference on Information Management and Evaluation held at the
Royal Holloway School of Business, University of London, on September 10-12, 2008.

Abstract: An Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system acquisition and implementation is a

strategic decision that can significantly affect future competitiveness and performance of a company.
This increases the criticality of this decision. Though several SMEs have taken the ERP
implementation decision, they don’t use a formal procedure for selecting an ERP system. The
awareness amongst SMEs for ERP is very low and very few know how they can benefit from an ERP
system.

Many SMEs believe that ERP systems are meant only for large enterprises on account of the cost and
the complexity involved in the implementation. There are others who consider ERP to be a magic
wand that will solve all their problems. While some SMEs decide to acquire a particular ERP solely
because their competitor has done so, others approach the selection as they would any other
software. Thus, most ERP decisions are taken without proper consideration and without aligning ERP
with business goals. This oft times results in a system that meets but part of a company’s
requirements. In this paper, the authors have proposed a framework to help SMEs select an ERP
system with care.

The framework is based on the insights gained from a study carried out at 6 SMEs who have acquired
an ERP system and have implemented or are currently implementing it. In-depth interviews were
conducted with IT personnel, CEOs and others at these SMEs to understand the procedure adopted
in selecting an ERP system. This was aided by an extensive review of literature. Thus, this paper
presents the current selection procedure used by the six SMEs and proposes a systematic approach
to ERP acquisition that SMEs can adopt to ensure that the ERP system selected offers a better fit to
their requirements.

Keywords: ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) Software, SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises),
Information System Selection, Acquisition Framework

1. Introduction

With the opening up of the economy, organizations big and small have been facing increased
competition. In order to stay ahead, organizations are improving their customer service, reducing
costs and are looking for ways to respond quickly to the dynamic market conditions. To survive, thrive
and beat competition, enterprises the world over need to manage information effectively (Leon, 1999).
Enterprises, large and small, have been harnessing the power of Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) to compete in the global marketplace. An Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
system is one such solution that has the ability to provide tight integration of the various functions in
an organization and thus address their information needs.

An ERP system is an Information System (IS) that supports the functional units of an enterprise like
finance and accounting, HR, marketing and sales, manufacturing and logistics (Sadagopan, 1999).
ERP systems provide for seamless integration of all the information flowing through an organization
(Davenport, 1998), and are considered as the IT backbone of choice for large firms. It has done to
organizations, what internet has done to communication i.e. it has eliminated boundaries (Davenport,
2000). Today these systems are an IT strategy of choice, especially for large enterprises.

Most large enterprises, the world over, have either implemented or are in the process of implementing
ERP systems. Thus for ERP vendors, the large enterprise segment has reached a near saturation
and they have shifted their focus to the Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) segment. Sale of ERP in
the SME segment has increased also due to the fact that today prices of hardware have reduced and

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

the need for integrating systems between organizations has gone up (Gable and Stewart, 1999).
Though ERP implementations in SMEs have increased, the acquisition decision is not accorded the
importance due to it.

Acquiring ERP is a very challenging task for large and small companies alike. Due to the
organizational specificity of small organizations having fewer people and not knowledgeable about
ERP systems, they do not approach ERP acquisition the way large organizations do (Bernroider and
Koch, 2001). The awareness for ERP systems amongst SMEs is low because of which they are
unable to make an informed decision when it comes to acquiring ERP systems.

Some SMEs acquire ERP because their competitor has done so while others consider ERP to be just
another software system. Many of them even believe that all ERP packages are alike. Because of
this, SMEs do not undertake the planning and the preparation necessary for a project of such high
strategic importance. This may result in a system that meets but half of the organization’s needs,
leading to dissatisfaction amongst the employees among other problems. Thus, most ERP decisions
are taken without proper consideration and without aligning ERP with business goals.

The authors propose a framework for ERP system acquisition to enable SMEs to make an informed
decision and thus pave the way for a successful ERP system implementation. This study is part of a
larger study to understand ERP implementations at SMEs in India.

2. Literature Review

Most of the research conducted in the area of ERP is focused on implementation and the problems
and issues surrounding it (Esteves and Pastor, 2001; Verville, 2000). A lot of research has gone into
determining the critical success factors for implementation of an ERP system (Al-Mashari et al., 2003;
Akkermans and Van Helden, 2000, Nah et al., 2001; Bingi et al., 1999; Holland and Light, 1999).
There are a few studies on the issue of ERP acquisition. These studies focus on buying and
implementing ERP software with care, in order to ensure a better understanding of the buying process
and reduce the risk and uncertainty associated with the acquisition of ERP systems.

Verville and Halingten (2003) divided the acquisition process into six stages namely:
ƒ The planning process
ƒ The information search process
ƒ The selection process
ƒ The evaluation process
ƒ The choice process and
ƒ The negotiation process.

During the planning process, the acquisition team is formed. The next step is where information about
vendors and packages is gathered and screened. During the next process a short list of possible
vendors is created who are evaluated in the evaluation stage. In the choice stage, the result of the
evaluation process is used to make the final choice. The negotiation stage may conclude with the
signing of the final contract. This study proved that contrary to the belief that IT acquisition is a fairly
simple activity, the task of acquiring ERP is complex, involved, demanding and intensive.

Another study (Verville et al., 2005) identified ten factors critical to successful acquisitions. Some of
those factors are:
ƒ Clear and unambiguous authority
ƒ Planned and structured processes
ƒ Establishment of selection and evaluation criteria
ƒ Partnership approach
ƒ User participation, etc.

Bernroider and Koch (2001) carried out an empirical study concerning the differences in ERP system
selection by large and midsize organizations. This study revealed that organization size had a
significant influence on ERP package selected. SAP R/3 was selected by large organizations while
SMEs often chose products that were priced lower. Another finding of the study was the importance
given to adaptability and flexibility of software by SMEs, which indicates their need to retain processes
unique to their business. Also, short implementation times and lower costs are very important to

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

SMEs (Everdingen et al., 2000). Everdingen et al. (2000) did a study on ERP adoption by European
midsize companies. From this study, the following facts emerged: European midsize companies focus
more on product characteristics and less on supplier characteristics. For them, the vendor being the
market leader or having a superior corporate image does not matter.

Ziaee et al., (2006) propose a two phase procedure to select an ERP vendor and software. During
phase 1, a project team is formed and information is gathered on ERP vendors and their products and
the systems characteristics identified. Phase 2 comprises of a modular approach to ERP vendor
selection and proposes a 0-1 programming model to minimize total costs associated with procurement
and integration. Baki and Cakar (2005) performed a study on ERP package selection in 55 Turkish
manufacturing companies and proposed 17 criteria for ERP selection.

There are several other methods proposed to select an ERP system. Some of them are the Nominal
group technique and the analytic hierarchy process which suggest 10 criteria for evaluating ERP
projects (Teltumbde, 2000) and a two-dimensional analysis and fuzzy set theory based decision
making method (Wang and Wei, 2004).

3. Research Methodology

The research strategy for this study was a multiple-case design with six SMEs who had taken the
ERP decision and had selected an ERP vendor and package. This approach gave room for
investigating how these SMEs went about their ERP selection decision. The authors conducted in-
depth interviews with CEOs, Managing Directors, IT personnel, General Managers and consultants at
these six SMEs, all of whom played an important role in the ERP acquisition decision.

Open-ended questions were used during the interview in order to provide for a deeper understanding
of the procedure adopted while selecting an ERP system. This allowed for flexibility in the interview
process and allowed to preserve the exploratory nature of the study. The interviews were transcribed
and verified by the SMEs to ensure accuracy in data collection. Further clarifications were sought via
e-mail. These interviews were conducted over a period of six months.

The companies selected are SMEs in Southern India and the criteria for selection are:
ƒ A turnover in the range of Rs. 10 Crores to Rs. 300 Crores.
ƒ A New acquisition
ƒ Selection of a packaged ERP system and not a custom built one.

The reason why only 6 SMEs were chosen was due to the complexities involved in the acquisition
process, the large amount of time required to gather information from each SME and personal
financial constraints.

4. The Cases

The companies and the situation that prevailed before a suitable ERP system was acquired are
described below (For the sake of confidentiality, the names of the companies have been masked.).
Name of the Profile and Background
Company
Alpha Turnover: Rs. 50 Crores; Headcount:400
This Company is a manufacturer and supplier of LPG and CNG conversion kits for
automobiles and enjoys a market share of nearly 70% in India. The company has
manufacturing plants in 6 different cities. They source the different components they
need from nearly 60 suppliers. Alpha is recognized by several OEMs and receives
export orders mainly from America, Asia and Europe.

Alpha was using Tally, an accounting software, and a proprietary software to meet
their information needs. Information was spread across several different locations and
hence was not available in real time. It was also difficult to track movement of
materials and to know what was happening at the different locations. It was very
difficult to rely on the data obtained from these different systems.

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

Name of the Profile and Background
Company
Turnover: Rs. 163 crores; Headcount:450
This Company is a manufacturer and exporter of quality incense. With 6 brands and 86
Beta different combinations offered in them, they meet the needs of customers worldwide.
Thus, they have a strong presence on the domestic front and export to over 40
countries. With a current turnover of Rs. 163 crores, the company is set to reach a
target of Rs. 300 crores by 2010. They have a current market share of 30%.

At Beta, most functions are carried out in an ad-hoc manner. They used Tally, an
accounting software, Microsoft Excel and Management Information Systems (MIS) to
meet each department’s needs. Data needed to be entered in more than one location
resulting in duplication of efforts and the resultant data was unreliable. The systems
were all built keeping individual department’s needs in mind and hence could not be
integrated as they were all built differently.
Gamma Turnover: Rs. 150 crores; Headcount:500
This Company is a leading electronics manufacturing services (EMS) company in
India. They deliver complete end-to-end manufacturing solutions to technology
companies around the world. The company is a part of the global EMS alliance that
aims at delivering high quality electronic components at minimal costs and is counted
amongst the top three homegrown EMS companies in India.

Gamma was using an ERP earlier. So they were not new to ERP systems. Two years
after implementing an ERP system, the requirements of the organization outgrew the
capabilities of the ERP system. It was not possible to integrate it with other software
like the quote management system that came in later. Looking back, they felt that they
had not considered the future growth and requirements of the company.
Omega Turnover: Rs. 12 crores; Headcount:280
Omega is manufacturer of forgings for a wide range of specifications. This Company
has a current turnover of Rs. 12 crores with a projected turnover of Rs. 100 crores by
the year end. They have manufacturing plants in two locations and a large product line.
They have clients both in India and abroad.

Omega had a custom-built software to meet the specific needs of the various
departments in the organization. This was a stand-alone application that could not be
interfaced with any other applications like Tally which was used for accounting
purposes. This resulted in islands of information which ensured that information was
never available when needed. They felt the need to increase transparency, empower
users and disseminate information quickly.
Eta Turnover: Rs. 10 crores; Headcount:200
This company, a family owned business, is a manufacturer of good quality stationery
for offices, students and for personal use. Their products are said to be innovative and
stylish to suit modern day needs and meet international quality standards. They cater
to the domestic market.

Tally software was used for all the accounting needs of the organization. The problems
they were facing were that of not knowing the exact status of production, and order
fulfillment was almost always error prone. Many a time the information needed to take
a decision was not available when needed. Since the company was on the growth
path, they felt that they had to have a system that integrated the working of the various
departments and allowed to manage orders more easily.
Kappa Turnover: Rs. 100 crores; Headcount: 50
Kappa is into the construction business and develops commercial spaces, interiors and
builds residential apartments. They have offices in 10 different cities with a current
turnover of Rs. 100 crores.
Kappa had been using a mini-ERP from a local vendor, which they were promised
would support their growth. They were also using MS-Projects and MS Excel. All these
applications were working in isolation and could not be integrated. Since they were

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

 planning to grow exponentially in the next five years, they felt they needed a system
that would support their growth.
5. A Framework for Acquisition of ERP System

5.1 Current Practices

Before the authors present the framework, here are some observations on the current ERP
acquisition procedure adopted by the 6 SMEs.
SMEs do not follow any formal procedure for acquiring an ERP (Bernroider and Koch, 2001). Future
growth of the company is rarely taken into account during the acquisition. Except for two companies,
the rest based their choice on reasons stated below:
ƒ Someone known to the SME had recommended a particular vendor
ƒ Parent company required them to implement ERP
ƒ Familiarity with vendor, having dealt with him/her earlier (one company).

SMEs approach ERP system selection like any other Information System acquisition, blissfully
unaware of the changes it will call for at the organizational and individual levels. Very little attention is
paid to documentation. When a vendor is called in, based on the recommendation of a friend (There is
no way of determining if the vendor and the solution are apt for the SME.), no documentation is
available regarding the processes and practices of the organisation. The vendor is asked to perform a
study of the organization and understand the working of the organization and use that to suggest a
solution. In some cases, there are just one or two people who are able to provide the vendor’s team
with the details needed. Sometimes, SMEs even expect vendors to tell them what they need, thus
exposing themselves to a situation where the end result may not be what they want.

In some cases, the payments to be made to the vendor were independent of deliverables. As a result,
nearly 80% of the payment was made causing the implementation partner to lose interest in the
project. The implementation partner team members did not remain till the end of the project resulting
in the new member having to spend time to understand the project situation contributing to a delay in
the implementation process. No credibility check was done on vendor and none at all on
implementation partner. The vendor played no role in the implementation and the service provided by
the implementation partner was far from satisfactory.

In most cases, the ERP decision was taken by top management along with the System Administrator
lending credence to the fact that they consider it to be yet another IT project. This kind of centralized
decision making is adopted by SMEs in order to reduce costs or due to a lack of know-how in other
departments (Bernroider and Koch, 2001). User participation and communication were given no
importance during the acquisition process.

5.2 A Framework for Acquisition of ERP system

Based on the above observations and the literature reviewed, the authors propose a framework for
successfully selecting an ERP vendor and acquiring an ERP package. This framework consists of
three phases namely Plan, Prepare and Execute as depicted in figure 1. The details of the phases
and the steps within each are presented below.

5.2.1 Phase 1: Plan

ƒ Form an ERP Acquisition Team (EAT).

The composition of this team should be such that it has the brightest and best minds from each
functional area in the organization, thus forming a cross-functional team. They should be good
communicators, well versed with the working of their department. It would be prudent on the part
of SMEs to ensure that at least some members of this team have prior experience either
implementing ERP or working with ERP systems. These individuals would be able to bring in their
knowledge of ERP into the organization which is otherwise lacking in SMEs.
Since SMEs may have a shortage of people, they can do one of two things to form this team.
They could
• Employ individuals with prior ERP experience: Doing this would allow SMEs to
reduce their reliance on external consultants at this stage.

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

 • Hire independent external consultants: Care should be taken to ensure that these
consultants are not tied down to any one vendor and can provide an unbiased
opinion.

Next,
ƒ EAT to study and document current business processes and technology in use.
ƒ Identify core strengths and weaknesses.
ƒ Determine what is expected from the new system keeping organization goals in mind.

The main responsibility of this team will be to carefully study the current business processes and
technology in use and document them. Next, these processes need to be analysed and areas that
have been limiting the growth of the organization identified. This helps to determine areas that are
unique and critical to the growth of the organization and those that need to be refined or
improved. The outcome of the efforts of this team may or may not result in the ERP decision
being taken, as not all SMEs may require an ERP system. But an SME will know its core
strengths which give it an edge over its competitors and also the areas that are limiting their
growth and how to overcome them.

Thus, if an ERP system is recommended as a solution, SMEs will be better prepared to evaluate
the ERP packages available as they know what they need. This will help them to decide what
practices to preserve, where to bring in best practices, what features and functionality to look for
in the new system etc. Keeping the future growth of the organization in mind, both current and
future requirements have to be defined here. It is also necessary at this stage to define measures
of business performance to enable comparison after an ERP system has been installed. The
recommendation of this team has to be communicated to everyone who will be affected by the
new system to ensure user participation and buy-in right from the start.

5.2.2 Phase 2: Prepare

ƒ Identify ERP system vendors and products.
ƒ Send Request for Information (RFI) to vendors with the requirements identified in earlier
phase.

Once the requirements of the organization are known, it is important to evaluate and select
one solution that best fits the SME’s needs. For this it is necessary to find information about
ERP vendors and their products. This information can be gathered from various secondary
sources like trade journals, reports, company web sites, industry analysts etc. The vendors
identified thus, can then be sent a RFI containing the initial requirements of the desired
system. It is important to note that information should be collected from vendors big and
small. Sometimes, it may be possible for a smaller vendor to meet the requirements of a SME
better than a large and reputed vendor.

The following information should be collected about the product, the vendor and the
implementation partner:

Product/Package factors:
ƒ Features and functionality that fit the requirements of the SME
ƒ Scalability: Ability to support the growth of the organization
ƒ Price of both the product and services
ƒ User friendliness
ƒ Easy maintenance not requiring the intervention of external programmers
ƒ Ease of integration with other systems/applications
ƒ Ease of data migration
ƒ Use of latest technology
ƒ Flexibility
ƒ Availability of modules: Are the modules needed available at present or will they be
made available in the future?
ƒ Standardization (Multilanguage, multicurrency support etc.)
ƒ Platform independence
ƒ Network architecture and security
ƒ Hardware needed

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

 Vendor factors:
ƒ Experience and knowledge of your business
ƒ Financial stability
ƒ Market share
ƒ Vision
ƒ Number of implementations, consultants onboard and implementation partners
ƒ Success in delivering solutions to organizations similar to you in size, volume and
operations
ƒ Integrity and dedication
ƒ Research and Development efforts
ƒ Availability of other packages like Customer Relationship Management (CRM),
Supply Chain Management (SCM), etc. which may be needed in future
ƒ Post sale support services
ƒ Etc.

Implementation partner factors: Since an implementation partner will be the one doing the
implementation, it is necessary to find out their level of competence. These factors can be
considered for the purpose:

ƒ Implementations done in the past

ƒ Consultants level of domain expertise
ƒ Reference sites
ƒ Local support (very important if SME is in a smaller city)

The above factors are a combination of the factors presented by Bernroider and Koch (2001),
Verville and Hallingten (2003), Wei and Wang (2004), Baki and Cakar (2005), Wei et al.
(2005), Ziaee et al. (2006) and what emerged from the study.

ƒ Collate and Compare this information.

ƒ Draw up a shortlist of vendors.
This has to be done on the basis of the information gathered in the earlier step. While so
many factors were listed above and need to be considered, there are some factors that need
to be paid added attention. It is important to note that the package selected should be one
that fits the requirements of the organization as closely as possible. Not doing this would
make way for two options; either completely customizing the ERP system to fit the SME’s way
of doing business or undertaking a massive reengineering effort to entirely change the current
way of working to adopt ERP’s standard way of working. Both these options are highly time
consuming and costly.

If the ERP system is customized to meet the SME’s needs, these changes will offer a new
system that fits the current way of doing business. By doing this, the benefits that an ERP
system implementation will bring will be lost as the modules have been customized totally.
Also, the changes made will have to be repeated whenever there is an upgrade. This calls for
a very high dependence on external consultants.

In case the SME decides to adapt entirely to ERP’s way of working, this would cause a
massive change in the organizational units, roles and responsibilities, skills required etc.
(Ziaee et al., 2006). This would require training and other change management efforts that will
add to the cost of implementation. Thus, it would be prudent for SMEs to scout for a package
that meets at least 70-80% of their needs, limiting the customization and ensuring that the
change it will bring along will be minimal.

If an SME is unable to find a package to suit their needs, they could then have a vendor of
repute to build an ERP system to meet their requirements. This system can serve the needs
of other companies in the same industry.

At the end of this step, a final list of three or less number of vendors is arrived at.

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

 1. Plan
ƒ Form an ERP Acquisition Team (EAT)
ƒ EAT to study and document current business processes and
technology in use
ƒ Identify core strengths (which includes unique processes which
are critical to the organization) and weaknesses.
ƒ Determine what is expected from the new system keeping
organization goals in mind.

2. Prepare
ƒ Identify ERP system vendors and products.
ƒ Send Request for Information (RFI) to vendors with the
requirements identified in phase 1.
ƒ Collate and Compare this information.
ƒ Eliminate vendors that do not meet requirements.
ƒ Call remaining vendors for a demo and discussion.
ƒ Visit at least one reference site and check on service quality of
the implementation partner and satisfaction level of users.
ƒ Ask vendors to conduct a company audit to determine cost and
time needed to implement an ERP system.
ƒ RFP from vendors

3. Execute
ƒ Select vendor that offers a best fit to organizational needs.
ƒ Decide on
o Project Timelines
o A single point of decision making
o Terms of reference for problem escalation
o Payment schedules, ensuring that payments are linked
to deliverables.
o Responsibilities of vendor, Implementation Partner and
client organization.
o Team to interface and monitor the implementation
(Maybe different from EAT)
ƒ Sign an SLA with vendor to ensure high level of service at all
times during and after the ERP system implementation.
ƒ Communicate decision taken and results expected, changes
envisaged etc. to all concerned to enable better user buy-in.
ƒ Begin implementation.

Figure 1: A Framework for ERP System Acquisition

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

 ƒ Call remaining vendors for a demo and discussion.
ƒ Visit at least one reference site and check on service quality of the implementation partner
and satisfaction level of users.

Here, vendors are asked to provide a detailed product demo. They are provided with
scenarios and company data, prepared during phase 1, and asked to demonstrate how their
product performs certain functions (Wei and Wang, 2004). The representatives from various
departments should pose questions on processes that are special and seek clarifications.
This helps in understanding how the system works and little is left to chance. A visit to a
reference site would help understand the service quality of the implementation partner. Most
vendors just provide a presentation that highlights the features of their product which is
insufficient to judge the product and its capabilities.

ƒ Ask vendors to conduct a company audit to determine cost and time needed to implement an
ERP system.
ƒ RFP from vendors

Soon after the vendors should be asked to conduct a company audit which will help them to
determine the cost and time required to implement the ERP system. Now, the vendors could
be asked to give their final proposals (RFP) which will be evaluated to determine the finalist. It
is important to check on the following factors with respect to the project:

ƒ Total time of project

ƒ Total cost
ƒ Training, technical support, after sales service, upgrading the versions of software

5.2.3 Phase 3: Execution

ƒ Select vendor that offers a best fit to organizational needs.
ƒ After deciding on the vendor, the ERP package and the implementation partner, it is
necessary to ensure the following before the implementation begins:
• Project Timelines
• A single point of decision making
• Terms of reference for problem escalation
• Payment schedules ensuring that payments are linked to deliverables.
• Responsibilities of vendor, Implementation Partner and client organization.
• Team to interface and monitor the implementation (Maybe different from EAT)
ƒ Sign an SLA with vendor to ensure high level of service at all times during and after the ERP
system implementation.
ƒ Communicate decision taken and results expected, changes envisaged etc in order to ensure
user participation all through the acquisition.
ƒ Select the vendor and the ERP package which is the best fit.

At the end of this process, a SME will have an ERP package that meets its requirements and is
aligned with its goals.

Conclusion

This study presents a framework for ERP system selection by SMEs. This framework emphasizes the
following:
ƒ A cross functional team to determine what is expected from the new system
ƒ Communication of the decisions taken and the changes it will bring
ƒ User participation at every step
ƒ A proper check on the vendor and the implementation partner

While strong management commitment is listed by most researchers as a critical factor for successful
implementation, this aided by a well planned acquisition strategy will ensure the selection of the right
ERP system for the SME. This will pave the way for the implementation of a system that will provide
SMEs with a competitive advantage.

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

 This framework is not without its limitations. Since the findings are from six SMEs, they cannot be
generalized to a larger population. The results of this study may provide SMEs with valuable
knowledge on ERP acquisition and may enable them to change the way they approach acquisition at
present. Future research could be aimed at understanding how such an ERP system acquisition will
impact the implementation. Some other areas worth investigating are: if acquisition of a “wrong“ ERP
system could lead to a failed implementation; what are the factors that influence ERP system
selection amongst SMEs, etc.

References
Akkermans, H. and Van Helden, K. (2000) “Vicious and virtuous cycles in ERP implementation: a
case study of interrelations between critical success factors”, European Journal of Information
Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 35-46.
Al-Mashari, M., Al-Mudimigh, A. and Zairi, M. (2003) “Enterprise resource planning: a taxonomy of
critical factors”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 146, pp. 352-64.
Baki, B. and Cakar, K. (2005) “Determining the ERP package-selecting criteria: the case of Turkish
manufacturing companies”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11, No.1, pp. 75-86.
Bernroider, E. and Koch, S. (2001) “ERP selection process in midsize and large organizations”,
Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 7, No. 3,pp. 251-7.
Bingi, P., Sharma, M.K. and Godla, J.K. (1999) “Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation”,
Information Systems Management, Summer, pp. 7-14.
Davenport, T. (1998) “Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 76, No. 4, pp. 121-131.
Davenport, T. (2000) “Mission critical”, Harvard Business Press.
Esteves, J. and Pastor, J. (2001) “Enterprise resource planning systems research: an annotated
bibliography”, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 7, No. 8, pp. 1-52.
Everdingen, Y., Hillegersberg, J. and Waarts, E. (2000) “ERP adoption by European midsize
companies”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 27-31.
Gable, G., Stewart, G. (1999) “SAP R/3 implementation issues for small to medium enterprises”.
http://is.lse.ac.uk/support/AMCIS/AMCIS1999/pdfiles/papers/269.pdf
Holland, C. and Light, B. (1999) “Critical success factors model for ERP implementation”, IEEE
Software, May/June, pp. 1630-6..
Leon, A. (1999) “Enterprise Resource Planning”, Tata McGraw-Hill.
Nah, F.F.-H., Lau, J.L.-S and Kuang, J. (2001) “Critical factors for successful implementation of
enterprise systems”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 7, No.3, pp. 285-96.
Sadagopan, S. (1999) “ERP A Managerial Perspective”, Tata McGraw-Hill.
Teltumbde, A. (2000) “A framework of evaluating ERP projects”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 28, pp. 4507-20.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2003) “A six stage model of the buying process for ERP software”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 32, pp. 585-94.
Verville, J., Bernadas, C. and Halingten, A. (2005) “So you’re thinking of buying an ERP? Ten critical
factors for successful acquisitions”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 18. No.6, pp.
665-677.
Wei, C.C. and Wang, M.J. (2004) “A comprehensive framework for selecting an ERP system”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 22, pp. 161-169.
Wei, C.C.,Chien, C.F. and Wang M.J. (2005) “An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 96, No. 1, pp. 47-62.
Ziaee, M., Fathian, M. and Sadjadi, S.J. (2006) “A modular approach to ERP system selection: a case
study”, Information Management and Computer Security, Vol. 14, No.5, pp. 485-495.

ECIME ’08 11th and 12th September,2008 University of London,Royal Holloway

View publication stats